ELP Program AI Use Policy

This policy applies to the following Department of Educational Leadership and Policy programs:

• Educational Administration PhD
• Educational Culture, Policy and Society EdM
• Educational Culture, Policy and Society PhD
• Educational Leadership EdD
• Higher Education PhD

There are few instances where ELP faculty approve of the use of AI. We consider acceptable types of AI use those in which the student might seek comparable existing tools for help. Students may use AI tools for the following tasks:

• Spell-check and minor grammatical revisions (as offered by a tool like Microsoft Word’s spellcheck). Use of programs (like those available in Grammarly) that offer more robust tools that substantially rewrite sentences, introduce ideas or alter authorial voice are not allowed.
• Formatting references to align with APA or other citation styles.
• Transcribing audio files with the use of UB-supported transcription tools.
• Creating tables, figures or infographics using the students’ own data or literature. (Note: the student must do the intellectual labor to conceptualize the image on their own. GenAI tools may solely be used to present the idea.)

For all departmental-accepted usage of AI tools, students are responsible for maintaining the security of their data and research materials in accordance with IRB approvals. Any usage of AI tools in the research process must be included in IRB applications. It is the student’s responsibility to maintain data security and any use of AI tools involving data must be IRB approved.

Students may not use AI tools for other tasks, including:

• Conceptualizing ideas (students must be able to articulate how they formulated the initial idea of their writing project)
• Crafting research questions
• Outlining or brainstorming paper ideas
• Synthesizing the literature
• Generating data (including fabricating interview transcripts, survey data, etc.)
• Analyzing data
• Generating any written text

We know that AI tools are rapidly shifting; students who have questions about the acceptable use of AI tools are encouraged to consult their advisor or the department chair about AI policy early on, before beginning any major requirements (e.g., exams, proposals, dissertations).

Any students who use AI-assisted tools will be required to submit a statement on generative AI usage. The statement should include which and how they used AI tools, including representative examples that show the student’s original work and changes generated by AI tools. For certain approved uses, it may be necessary to provide additional documentation to the student’s chair and committee, including pre- and post-edited drafts, prompts and outputs, and other materials.

Academic integrity is foundational to graduate learning and to the purpose and goals of this policy. To that end, it is expected that students will act honorably as they learn and develop ideas. Failure to comply with this policy will be considered a violation of the University at Buffalo, SUNY’s Graduate Academic Integrity Policy, and thus subject students to the Procedures therein.

Upon entering the ELP department, students will sign an AI Honor Statement that indicates they have reviewed and will comply with the policy.

If a dissertation committee member suspects the use of AI tools outside the acceptable bounds outlined above, the dissertation chair will meet individually with the student to discuss their concerns and how to rectify. If the student does not satisfactorily resolve the chair’s concerns, the student will then meet with their entire dissertation committee. If the student still does not resolve the committee’s concerns, they will meet with the department chair. If, after a conversation with the department chair, concerns remain, the student will be referred to the ELP Academic Standards Committee. Possible consequences of not addressing concerns after referral to Academic Standards will include referral to the University at Buffalo Office of Academic Integrity. At this stage additional consequences might include an inability to schedule a proposal or dissertation defense, committee members choosing to step off of the committee, or dismissal from the academic program.